Agenda item

17/00063/FUL - 37 Eldon Street/51 King Street Southsea PO5 4BS - Conversion of part of building to form 6 dwellings; external alterations to include rear (east) extension, second floor extensions and changes to fenestration; change of use of part ground floor to form a wine bar (Class A4 - Drinking Establishment - 70sqm) (Amended scheme to 16/01772/FUL) (report item 7)


The planning officer introduced the report and reported in the supplementary matters list that the applicant has provided amended drawings showing an amended site boundary, removing a disputed piece of land to the eastern boundary. Condition 2 has been updated to reflect the amended drawings and now reads as follows: 'Unless agreed in writing by the Local Planning Authority, the permission hereby granted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved drawings - Drawing numbers: 1540/E/02 Rev-C, 1540/P/20 Rev-N, 1540/P/21 Rev-G, 1540/P/23 Rev-A, 1540/P/24 Rev-A, 1540/P/25 Rev-A, 1540/P/26 Rev-A, 1540/P/27 Rev-A and 1540/P/28'.


The removal of the section of land referred to above reduces the amount of space available to provide bicycle storage facilities. Whilst the Highways Authority has previously raised concerns in respect of the facilities proposed, this amendment would only exacerbate the matter.


It is not considered that the bicycle storage facilities now proposed are adequate for the development and a condition seeking alternative provision is unlikely secure alternative facilities fully in line with the requirements of the Parking Standards SPD. However, having regard to the positive elements of the proposal and the site's proximity to the city centre, it is considered that an objection solely on the inadequacies of the bicycle storage facilities could not be sustained.


The recommendation remains unchanged. 


Deputations were then heard whose points are summarised:


Mr Paul Dawson local resident objecting, whose points included:

·         The site is two buildings which are separate and therefore are two different settings.

·         Concerned with the setting of 51 King Street and the proposed second storey extension.  All buildings in the pedestrianised area including the King Street Tavern are grade II listed.

·         The roof extensions being set back by 2.5m will make them somewhat less visible however the impact will still be intrusive.

·         No objections to the development of the site but do not think this will be an enhancement to the area.

·         Extremely small site for such an extensive development.

·         It has been acknowledged that the site cannot meet the parking standards.

·         Waste disposal acknowledged as unusual and is inadequate.


Mr Jonathon McDermott, agent whose points included:

·         Previous application for the site was submitted earlier this year but was withdrawn.  This application has greater emphasis on design and matching the King Street scene. 

·         Planning guidance states the need to preserve and enhance.  Heritage assets should not be allowed to be left derelict as this site has. 

·         Development complies with national standards.

·         The waste disposal is not unusual and there is a communal store accessed via a footpath, which has received the support of the council's waste officers.

Members' Questions

In response to questions the following matters were clarified:

·         The existing pitch of the roof is not visible from King Street.  The 2.5m setback will reduce the prominence but it will still be visible although be a stepping effect.

·         The bin store for the proposed wine bar will be in the building and waste will be moved to bins at the front of the property for collection.

·         The proposed roofs would be finished in slate with the retention of brickwork where possible.  The parapet will be topped with natural stone.


Members' Comments
Members' felt this was a good proposal although there were some concerns about the roofline and parking.  There were also some concerns about the King Street frontage and the impact of the dormer window.  On balance it was felt that this was a sensible use of the site and it would create good quality homes that are needed in the city.

RESOLVED that conditional permission be granted, subject to the conditions outlined in the City Development Manager's report.